As we careen towards socialism, keep this in mind

[OnceWasLost]

Still not seeing a solution, I'm thinking the inverse of your statement, for the 50 million uninsured, the quality would go up. :)

Issachar

The numbers vary on the "number of uninsured" Sure a socialized system would help the currently uninsured, but at what cost? 300 million plus that are insured would have their standard of care crashed overnight. The number is misleading too since anyone can go to any ER if they are in medical distress.

Above all of this, it begs the question, when did health care become a "right"? I need to know because it sure is treated as if it was one? If people are uninsured, is that an issue that the government should tax all of us. so as to provide it for those who are uninsured?:idunno

Let's consider the 45 million about which I saw a report. Here is the breakdown of those "uninsured"

According to the US Census Bureau, 17 million of those without health insurance live in households having over $50,000 in annual income. That's 38% of the uninsured in America.

In fact, 9 million - 20% of the uninsured - reside in households pulling down more than $75K a year.

And then there are the young invincibles. Over 18 million of the uninsured are people between the ages of 18 and 34. They spend more than four times as much on alcohol, tobacco, entertainment and dining out as they do for out-of-pocket spending on health care. They represent 40% of the uninsured in America.

14 million people without health insurance are eligible for government health care programs like Medicaid and S-CHIP but choose not to enroll. They represent %31 - nearly one third - of the uninsured in America.

The U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants who don't buy health insurance but still get health care.

So, how many are truly uninsured? Around eight million. Just 18% of the 45 million that we hear about so often."

The solution is to address the problem of tort reform, which causes excessive malpractice insurance rates and pushes up the costs. That kills two birds with one stone.

There are plenty of other ways to get a better control on costs. The problem is that like most issues, politicians would rather have an issue to exploit, rather than lose it, by fixing it, call it job security. Sadly, many politicians have a constituency that always needs to hear about the problems and inequity in the world (real or unreal) Now, if they were to get those problems corrected, then they have no reason for their existence. :tsk

[WhitemoonG]

Issachar

Thanks for your posts; your review of scripture admonishing us to be sensitive to the practical physical needs of those without means is certainly something that applies to us ALL, and something we all need to consider.


However, scriptural directives regarding Christlike living for INDIVIDUALS is not one and the same as turning over our means to a secular bureaucracy that usually does a worse job of meeting individuals' needs, and makes the problems even worse than at the start.


Complicating the analysis further is the fact that the 43 million uninsured are not all a monolithic homogenous group, all in that predicament for the same reason. Some are in the circumstance for reasons beyond their doing, and this is the basic theory behind public assistance/Medicaid/welfare type programs, funded by tax dollars, which are designed to hopefully meet some of that gap, with a modicum of means testing, to minimize gaming of the system. Obviously not a perfect situation, however.

Unfortunately, there is a sizeable percentage of the uninsured that are so because of intractable drug abuse, skid row type alcoholism, etc. These unfortunate folks also need to be ministered to, as much as they will allow, but sadly, handing them money and benefits usually doesn't change much.


And, there is a not insubstantial percentage who could have become insured, but because of arrogance, greed, or bad choices, or all of that, don't pursue it or pass on coverage options, in order to have lots more money for beer, cigarettes, snow skiing, whatever. Granted, this is just a simple sterotype, but this type of slothful, or arrogant behavior (Me? I don't need insurance, I'm not going to get sick, besides, I hate doctors anyway!) also adds significantly to the breakdown of the block always briefly referred to as uninsured.


This problem is complex, and does not lend itself to any easy comprehensive answer that is satisfactory to everybody, or takes care of everybody, part of it complicated, unfortunately, by HUMAN NATURE. And, this is no excuse for not considering things that could generally better it for all.


However, confiscatory government mandated programs take one problem and create even worse problems.

[Issachar]

OnceWasLost and WhitemoonG, thanks for your replies.

I am new here so most of you don't really know me. A couple of folks do from other boards. It takes time on these things to sort of get to know how each of us think ... i.e. our worldview.

I believe, as you folks do too, that there are two types of humans on the earth. Those in Adam and those in Christ. Of course those in Christ have been born again, are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and have become a new creation in Christ. The Father of the new creation that we are is God the Father. We've literally been cut off from the lineage of the first Adam and have been grafted into the second man from heaven, the Lord. (1 Cor. 15:46ish and on ...) As such, our thinking is quite different from those that remain unregenerate.

Given all that, I have to say that most of what I've posted, especially in my last post, is from the perspective of how we should deal with one another within the church. Gal.6:10 is a good example of what I mean. (I am using a library computer right now for the first time. So much is unfamiliar in how they have it set up. If I try to open another window to get a reference, such as from the Word, this one disappears. It took even the librarian a while to find this again, so I'm limited in this particular post.) There are poor within the church community and then there are the poor without (outside of) the church. The poor within the church, those that have truly been born again, can be discipled and helped, etc. Giving cash to the poor outside the church, except for very special cases, is not wise. It usually results in "enabling" a bad lifestyle.

OnceWasLost posted some info on the percentages of folks not insured and why. The data surprised me as it is very different than my experiences have me thinking. Anyone I know that earns 50-100 thousand per year is working for a company that supplies healthcare coverage. But I guess there must be a lot of exceptions. The 47-50 million often quoted does not include illegals because they are not Americans and the number fluctuates between 47-50 million Americans. The large percentage of 18-34 year olds does not surprise me given today's immoral climate within the culture.

I did mention in my posts, I think, that we need to be discerning. If someone went into debt for a new inground pool, and new living room furniture and a new bedroom suit, and car and another car and charges weekend golf outings on a card and reaches the point where they've crashed and burned .... well, the only help they need is some instruction in life.

WhitemoonG mentioned that the problem is very complex. That is very true. I hope this doesn't sound like a useless "pat answer/comment", but as believers, we need to be about our Father's business and follow His leading in all we do. That is the ONLY wisdom there is in determining action.

The gov't doing what it does to try and help the poor is going to always be very inefficient. The fallen human nature assures that. Gov't is people, mostly unregenerate people. The only "wisdom" they have in conducting business is from the sin nature. It must of necessity, be flawed. I don't think we need to get too worked up about how they do things. They are clueless. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, it's just how it is. Our taxes WILL NOT go down if they found a way, starting tomorrow morning, to deal very fairly with all. They won't go up much either no matter how much they wast ... ummm ... spend. Most funding of gov't programs is via the creation of fiat money anyway. The Dems and Reps will always spend more than they have coming in. The Dems, generally speaking, fund there excessive spending by raising taxes and the Reps do it by adding to the national debt which is a tax on our children and our children's children and beyond. Neither party is fiscally responsible nor will they be to the end. No other party will ever be in power either. Both of the main parties will tend towards socialism; imho, the way of the NWO; the ruling elite and the poor masses; a global, socialist state. Healthcare, or lack of, like so many things, affects all of us. We don't want millions of sick people in society. So in one way, it's good for all of us if they are taken care of. Gov't takes care of so many other things .......

Unfortunately, the gov't has no way of discerning. It's all or nothing. That won't change until Jesus' return.

Issachar

[Issachar]

... scriptural directives regarding Christlike living for INDIVIDUALS is not one and the same as turning over our means to a secular bureaucracy that usually does a worse job of meeting individuals' needs, and makes the problems even worse than at the start. hmmm ... thinking some more on this ....

We do have "scriptural directives regarding Christlike living for INDIVIDUALS". I see from other of your posts elsewhere that we don't need to go into all that as you apparently know scripture. However, I do wonder about you saying, "is not one and the same as turning over our means to a secular bureaucracy". We don't determine that. The bureaucracy just takes a chunk of our means. How much they take won't be reversed and if they want more, it won't be stopped. Some might consider that pessimistic. I don't believe much is pessimism or optimism. There is just how things are in this world and being in the world but not of it, we are content in Christ. (I know you know that ... I say some stuff for the benefit of possible passers by) If being contented came from circumstances, we'd be as miserable, if not more, then those that are still lost in sin. We'd still be wanting this and wanting that ...

I'm still left with wondering this:
Suppose that there is a case where a company ships it's work offshore and .... say 100 people are out of work and without insurance. One of those people, after the benefits run out (usually the end of the month) is involved in an accident. They are transported to the hospital in an ambulance ($1000?) and receive emergency surgery followed by 8 days of recovery. He gets the bill two weeks later. $43,000.00. Should that person receive help from someone? What if it sinks him financially and he can't make the mortgage and loses his house. Now his family is homeless because without a job, no will even rent to the guy. A simplistic scenerio to be sure, but what about that? :idunno

The fact is, society, due mostly to gross moral breakdown over the past few decades, has some really, really messed up situations. There are many homeless or about to be homeless. Now I'm not talking about the coccaine users and meth users, etc. In my mind, there needs to be a distinction between the above scenerio and the druggies. At least in how they are helped. I don't want to see the druggies just dropped off of a cliff either. Some of them grew up in abusive situations, split homes, violent homes ... just plain garbage. I am friends with a brother that is involved in a couple cases that are so sad and so complicated. I crossed paths with a man who is involved in a very bad situation through no fault of his own. Talking with my friend, it turns out that he it the case worker in this other mans situation. Talk about a small world. It's easy for most Americans to live in the 'burbs and have a Toyota and a SUV and two incomes and live decent lives and be oblivious to what's across the river or at the other end of town. Those folks are usually lumped together as one "class" of people and it's easy to assume that they all get welfare and so their needs are met.

Still with no clue as to what a good solution is, but the more I work on it, the more I think that there is no good solution. I am in NW Ohio and I can say that there is nothing but an increasing amount of folks out of work in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania, etc. and most jobs that they have the skills to do are being offered as "temporary" which means, usually, work as much as you want for a lower wage and no vacation pay, holiday pay, overtime pay and above all, no insurance. These folks resent holidays because the plant is shut down and so they don't get paid for those days. The financial stess, for some reason I don't quite get, causes more divorces which means more kids growing up in split homes which statistically puts them more at risk for abuse and eventual drug usage.

We live in a messed up world. Christians/the church, cannot cure it all. Free enterprise certainly cannot fix it and is often, due to greed, part of the problem and gov't cannot fix it, to be sure. I guess, as Christians, we can only deal with individuals as we are able and in the meantime, the "world", which obviously includes the gov't, will hobble along in it's own ungodly ways.

Issachar

[WhitemoonG]

Isaachar: Thanks again for your post. Maybe this is toward the end of the
1st quarter, but Welcome!

I especially like your last comment. Government does have some mechanisms for trying to be "discerning" & spend tax dollars wisely, but unfortunately that gets batted all over with almost as many versions of priorities as there are congressmen. No offense to the important people they are, offices they hold, and work they do, but it's just reality.

There have been, and are "means testing" designed to screen out the more deserving from the less, but even with those generally important safeguards, people gaming the system is still problematic, and the additional computers, and government paid employees necessary to maintain such, adds a lot of cost that partly negates some of the "savings" from the established entitlement criteria.

Blessings!

[HisAlways]

I love how so many of the people on this board are more than willing to sacrifice their sons and daughters for "our freedom" (as if somehow our freedom hinged on who is in charge of Iraq?!), but ask those who have more than they need to give up some money to feed and give medical care to the poor (which is what socialism does), and everyone suddenly gets tight pocketed. That comparison doesn't even make sense, simply because parents are NOT sacrificing their sons and daughters in Iraq. Anyone who is in the military, serving in Iraq has done so of their own choosing. Parents are not responsible for their legal aged childrens' decisions. I'm so sick and tired of hearing that argument, which is so obviously false.

This is an ALL volunteer military. What is so hard to understand about that?:panic

That said....I do not know of too many Christians that are NOT willing to help the poor. However, I know many Christians who are opposed to being FORCED to give their hard earned money to those that refuse to take opportunities to improve their lives, or who feel that others OWE them, and will continue to take and take without doing anything about their situation. You can give someone fish for the rest of their lives, but how is that helping them, if you do not teach them to fish?

If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? (NIV, 1 John 3:17) Giving, throught the Christian love in our heart is different from the government TAKING in taxation.

[MrMannn]

Cory:
Are you going to march us all, along with the entire city, on foot into the countryside, so you can direct our "re-education camp" like Pol Pot did, setting up the superior people's socialist republic of Cambodia?

Without such draconian measures, a socialist paradise cannot exist. Every extreme socialist (read communist) system like Cory describes has started with purges, genocides, mass arrests and re-education camps.

Socialism depends on a competent government (doesn't exist),
and a selfless people (never existed).
The utopia that Cory offers (no prices/currency, just take what you need), cannot exist without draconian changes.

Indeed every society that embraced Cory's vision, has persecuted the church. This extreme brand of socialistic utopia (communism) has always been espoused by atheists.

Seeing this history of atheist murderers chasing after the same vision...
How Cory, can you as a Christian socialist follow this same path? A path that has never been described in the Bible?

Will killing babies and gay marriages be a part of your socialist vision?
I would like to know, Cory.

[Issachar]

Will killing babies and gay marriages be a part of your socialist vision? you lost me on that part. I think those things have been present under all systems since at least Nimrod, if not sooner.

Issachar

[mercyandgrace]

Hillary Clinton made a statement about "shared wealth". I wonder if she wants to give up half of her millions of dollars to the poor. I doubt it.

George Soros has already moved his money out of the country and into off-shore bank accounts. So has Diane Feinstein and Claire McCaskill. I'm sure that there are a lot more of our "elites" who have done this.

The rich do not want to share their wealth and they are not going to. The burden will fall upon the working middle class to take care of the non-working poor class.

Don't be fooled by the utopian way of thinking. Socialism doesn't work. You will always have the rich ruling elite.

I love capitalism. It represents a free society. I also believe in faith-based charities. BUT, I want a say-so in who I help out. I don't want any rich elite lawmaker telling me who I'm going to give my money to.

Socialism is a phony-baloney ideology. Elect Hillary Clinton and that's what you're going to get. I'm sure Hillary and Bill have already taken steps to PROTECT THEIR PERSONAL WEALTH.

[OnceWasLost]

Socialism is a phony-baloney ideology. Elect Hillary Clinton and that's what you're going to get. I'm sure Hillary and Bill have already taken steps to PROTECT THEIR PERSONAL WEALTH.

Count on that! classic do as I say, not as I do.